To no one's surprise, Minnesota unanimously rules for Al Franken. Stay tuned as loser Norm Coleman finds another way to be a total and utter douchebag.WAITING FOR THE OTHER SHOE ... Curiously, Norm Coleman has officially conceded, at which point the only question remaining is, how will the GOP still try to obstruct seating Franken?

Once upon a time there was a make believe character whose name was made Doris by popular referendum. Denying the voice of the people, he insisted on calling himself Stockwell. I know, I know... that's as likely as a sober parent naming their child Raphael. Anyway... in September of 2007 a controversy erupted about lawful access to your personal data and communications online, then Minister of Public Safety Day (paging Mr. Orwell to the white courtesy phone) put on his denial goggles in an interview with Jesse Brown on Search Engine.

Jesse Brown: I asked Stockwell Day to assure Canadians, once and for all, that his government would never try to remove court oversight from lawful access and here's what he said...

Stockwell Day: We are not, in any way shape or form, wanting extra powers to... for police to pursue items without warrants. That is not what our purported legislation is going to be doing. That is previous Liberal legislation. That is not the path we're walking down.

Now along comes Peter Van Loan to inform Canadians that either his predecessor was a cowardly liar or, in an authoritarian swing away from privacy and freedom, Canada's new government has decided to do away with the quaint notion of warrants and probable cause and all that bother. If the new Lawful Access legislation passes, it will strip court oversight from a number of police information access demands where Minister Van Loan assures us we have "No expectation of privacy".

It is worth the time to listen to Van Loan squirm and dodge as he tries to deploy the kiddie porn and terror excuses to broaden his government's ability to plumb the net for identity information. The complete podcast is available at TVO and it is well worth a listen. There's more on this issue at Boing Boing and from the invaluable Michael Geist. This is an issue that will be of considerable interest going forward as digital communications proliferate. This legislation may represent the thin edge of the wedge that opens access to such novelty features as GPS tracking. The proposed legislation allows a three year exemption for smaller ISPs to allow them to factor in the cost of installing surveillance and storage capabilities. That, of course, indicates that a canny criminal will simply use the smaller points of access to operate from without even going to the bother of such things as anonymizers, encryption or even swiped wifi. This incursion into our online rights to privacy offers nearly no efficacy in the fight against actual criminals, so who does that leave...

Sandy Crux sees no problem with Tim Hudak being the second coming of Mike Harris. Good thinking, Sandy ... let's drag up memories of when Mike Harris ran things here. Make sure you let us know how that works out.

Over at "Phantom Observer," Vic asks his readers to ponder whether Michael Ignatieff is a "scholar" or an "intellectual." If asking this of his Blogging Tory readership, this would be akin to asking a tribe of chimpanzees to discuss the relative merits of fission versus fusion.

Once upon a time, a simple proposal of a coalition of Canadian opposition parties was a "coup." These days, the forcible arrest at gunpoint of a foreign leader in his pajamas, followed by his physically being dumped on a plane and exiled is, curiously, nota coup because, apparently, he was trying to do something with a referendum and his country's constitution and, God knows, we can't have that. In unrelated news, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper passing a "fixed dates" election law, then violating it almost immediately ... well, they're good with that. I have no idea how the difference works, but I'm guessing context is involved.

While Googling the Interwebz for a combination of "Harper", "deficit" and "Jesus Christ, what a moron", I chanced across this delightful bit of nostalgia from Blogging Tory "Right as Rain" from back in September of 2008. Let's all enjoy it together, shall we?

Defeating the Deficit Lie

... A common rallying cry is "conservatives=deficit"...

Repeat after me:

We are not in deficit. We are not in deficit. We are not in deficit. We are not in deficit. We are not in deficit. We are not in deficit...

In summary, the facts proven in this post are:

1. Canada is not running a budget deficit 2. Economists are predicting larger then forecast surpluses 3. Mike Harris did not leave the province of Ontario in a deficit 4. Jim Flaherty did not leave the province of Ontario in a deficit

We're better off with Harper.

Here at CC HQ, we like to describe that kind of post as "astonishingly, eye-rollingly, thigh-suckingly fucking stupid" or, for the sake of brevity, "going Twatsy."

Monday, June 29, 2009

Military brass bite their tongues over the 'hollow army'Why generals may be playing down the exhaustion of the Canadian army

It is an extraordinary testament to the resilience of Canadian troops that they've been able to conceal how much this country's combat forces have been exhausted by years of war in Afghanistan.

The refusal of the military to acknowledge the weariness means Canadians are unaware that the exhaustion of the combat mission is far worse than it has appeared. It's a fighting mission, we need to remind ourselves, that will continue for another 2½ years (until the end of 2011)...

While preparing a recent documentary about Natynczyk for The National, I was able to obtain a leaked internal military report on the state of the forces, signed by Leslie. The report actually refers to "the hollow army."

The restricted report, circulated several months ago only within the uppermost levels of the Defence Department, points out the current efficiencies in all branches of the military. Its most searing conclusion is that the army "is now operating beyond its capacity."

"The war in Afghanistan," the report warns, "illustrates deficiencies in the army and the Canadian Forces."

By way of rebuttal, Canada's Blogging Tories would like you to know that they have red t-shirts and yellow ribbons and fridge magnets up to here, and what are these crybabies whining about? In particular, "Neo Conservative" would like you to put a sock in it and think about the snowmobilers.

In totally unrelated news, CC HQ blogger Matt Bin writes books about stuff he knows, but don't let that convince you that he understands what he's talking about.

Though Canadian officials have repeatedly pointed to the UN no-fly list as an obstacle to Mr Abdelrazik leaving Sudan, the one specific exception allowed is for the listed person to travel to their country of citizenship.

CTV: Just getting up to speed on this "Abousfian Abdelrazik" thing because, apparently, there might be a story there somewhere.

If you want to see the face of true ugliness, you need only peruse the comments sections of the MSM for some reactions to the recent re-patriation of one Abousfian Abdelrazik, Canadian citizen. Behold, from the CBC:

How stupid is CANADIAN GOVERNMENT..........the one thing I thought Harper did right was not to fall on his sword when this crap came up in the media...I guess those days are over!!!!!!!!

Wonderful...should have left him there.....

Who paid for the flight, was it me the taxpayer?

He originally entered Canada illegally and claimed to be a "refugee" from Sudan. He now visits the country he is supposed to be a refugee from. If he really was a refugee why is he visiting Sudan? The UN has him marked as a suspect terrorist. I sure hope the RCMP keep a close eye on him.

They don't just put just anyone on the UN no-fly list. I would like to know what this immigrant did to get on the no-fly list. I guess the welfare rolls will get a little fatter next week.

Great to have him back...............NOT

I wonder how long before this peice [sic] of terrorist garbage files a lawsuit against the Canadian government.

who's coming next OSAMA-BIN-LADEN ? canada as become an haven for terrorist and there [sic] groups.

you can be certain neo-con the taxpayer payed the bill,

Oh Joy, what shall the leftards snot and bawl over this week? Oh yea they still have Khadr to free and repatriate into a country his family hates allegedly.

That last bit of dumbfuckitude was by MSM comments section fixture "SassyLassie," whose creepy racism and bigotry is well known. And things aren't much more pleasant over at CTV:

Was there a $10,000,000 cash payment waiting for him as he stepped off the plane. That seems to be the going rate for suspected terrorists.

did the liberal media roll out the red carpet for this character ?

Sorry, Canada is his "home"? He's been here give-or-take eight years out of his entire life. If I had fled a war-torn country to come here for a better life, why would I take a chance to go back even to visit my ailing mother. Now he won't be able to have a job or a bank account? Great, so will he end up on welfare in this country for the rest of his life, to which we will all be contributing? Nice.

Thats one more vote for the Liberal Party.Obama now has another argument to thicken the border.Turning our back on the UN and snubbing there no fly list is an insult to the world community.

I'll give you some truth that hurts. This guy was arrested when the Liberals were the government and they did nothing to help him.You lefties sure do have convienient memories.Seems to me a few cases of this happening was under a Liberal government but I guess it is easier to blame those conservatives.CTV and other might want to remind people of the facts every once in awhile.

Oh yes ...Canada open up your arms once again. We accept someone on a UN blacklist. Well done Canada, you once again gave my country away.

Thank god I lived the years I did cause this country is going down the tubes to destruction....and you have no one to blame but yourselves.

Comes to Canada as a refugee, but then returns to the country he fled from, and gets arrested, then pulls that Canadian Citizenship bulls%%t out of his back pocket. If you go back to the country you "fled" from for any reason, the government should let you rot, or go and find some bleeding hearts to send you some money for your defence. I am sick of people playing this game and I the taxpayer have to help bail them out.

They walk among you. Never forget that.

"What monstrosities would walk the streets, were some peoples' faces as unfinished as their minds."

I must confess, darlings, I may have to come up with something else for Saturday mornings -- I've posted all the Bugs Bunny cartoons at least once. Any suggestions?

P.S. Michael Jackson is still dead and I still don’t care. Freakshow.

P.P.S. More importantly, my feet still hurt from our corporate cocktail party on Thursday – standing for 8 hours in 40 degree weather while wearing the perfect LBD and a fabulous pair of heels will do that to a girl.

A gentle reminder about this afternoon's Bloggerpalooza, at the Huether in Waterloo. I figure I could stand a beer or two, and PSA is muttering something about showing up as well, but you never know with weird, reclusive musical geniuses like PSA -- they always come to a bad end one way or the other. Or so I've heard.

OTTAWA–Canada's outgoing information watchdog is threatening to seize documents after complaints that the bureaucratic wing of the Prime Minister's Office is stonewalling some access-to-information requests.

The information commissioner served formal notice on the Privy Council Office this week, warning that commission staff would use their legal powers to seize the documents themselves if the paperwork wasn't provided by today.

"I'm about to walk into PCO next week ... for files they didn't give us. We're going to take them and they can't stop us," Robert Marleau told the Star.

"I cannot be denied access. I can walk into any federal government premise without notice and take what I need."

In his book "Strictly Speaking," Edwin Newman demonstrates the danger of getting a little too excited and not being able to follow through:

In its purest form, British chauvinism expresses itself in a desire for Britain to win something. Anything. Thus the 10,000 meters in the 1972 Olympics, with the British commentator screaming about the British runner David Bedford, "The eyes of the world are on this man!" and the statement in the early stages, "The whole field, one suspects, is waiting for Bedford to make his move." When the race was over and Bedford, having had an off day, had come in twelfth, the commentator said, "Hmm. That was a curious run by Bedford. He never really made a positive move."

Too much foreplay, not enough climax, which naturally directs us to Canada's biggest IDiot Denyse O'Leary who -- having pimped the cinematic clusterfuck "Expelled" for month after month before its release -- felt singularly let down after she realized it was a piece of crap:

Two nights ago, I finally saw the Expelled film.

I had become almost proprietorial about the widely denounced #5 political documentary. I had first broken the story of its existence last August. I watched it pitch and roll through accusations of trickery, a threatened lawsuit over plagiarism and a real one over intellectual property, production delays (it was supposed to be released on Darwin’s birthday but was pulled for edit), and, inevitably, street drama...

... the film badly needed an explanation of why there is an intelligent design controversy.

And yet, having been burned thusly, Denyse simply can't avoid stroking herself feverishly over the next bit of Intelligent Design offal coming down the chute:

On June 23, Dr. Stephen Meyer's long-awaited Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design (HarperOne) will break open the radical and comprehensive new case, revealing the evidence not merely of individual features of biological complexity but rather of a fundamental constituent of the universe: information.

She really is adorable, isn't she, kids? Because, by God, there's a pony in that shitpile somewhere and Denyse isn't going to stop until she finds it.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Right wing talker Michael Savage vowed yesterday during his broadcast that he will retaliate against media watchdog Media Matters for America by posting pictures and “pertinent information” about the organization's staff on his website...

... the threat to post pictures and personal information about media watchdogs as a response to criticism can legitimately be perceived as a threat. Michael Savage may be famous for brash talk and incendiary language, but recent history must be taken into account as his “Savage Nation” may take the talker’s inflammatory posting as marching orders to take action against his enemies.

Huh. Posting personal information about people you don't like on the Intertoobz. Sure seems to be a lot of that going around these days.

In unrelated news, we Lefties can be really, really mean. That's what I've heard.

Apparently, local blogger/author James Bow and the missus are having a good week. He would also like to remind local bloggers of the Waterloo-Wellington Blogstravaganza this Saturday, June 27, 4 pm at the Huether Hotel in Waterloo.

Just think -- beer, pizza, and literate people who are not stupid. Kind of a win-win-win all around, yes?

The fallout from an extramarital affair between Ensign and Cindy Hampton, a campaign staffer, is threatening to ensnare other Republican leaders as they try to marshal opposition to the Obama administration.

A June 11 letter written by Hampton's husband, published today in the Las Vegas Sun, claims that at least one of Ensign's colleagues, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., knew about the affair more than a year before Ensign's public confession, but did not act to remove him from party leadership...

Initially, it seemed as though the splatter would be confined to Ensign's political ambitions. After admitting to the affair on Tuesday, Ensign - a rising star among conservatives who was thought to be considering a presidential run in 2012 - resigned his post as the Senate's fourth-leading Republican.

Then it emerged that Cindy Hampton's salary - paid from Ensign's political payroll - had doubled during the time of their affair, which went on from December 2007 to August 2008. Also in that period, Hampton's son landed a $1,000-a-month internship with the National Republican Senatorial Committee - chaired by Ensign. After Hampton and her husband, Doug (also a top Ensign aide), were dismissed by Ensign, the senator allegedly helped Doug Hampton find a job with a Las Vegas airline that is among his major campaign contributors.

So, wankers ... feel free to lecture the rest of us on morals and family values and such. Seriously, take it away. Let me make myself comfortable first, because this should be good.

BY THE WAY, as soon as he's an amoral scumbag and sleazebucket, Republican governor Sanford is suddenly a Democrat:

But you knew that, right?Fox News Channel: Because the mentally deficient deserve their own news outlet, too.

... Internet postings on June 2 and 3 proclaimed “outrage” over the June 2, 2009, handgun decision by Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook and Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer, of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, further stating, among other things: “Let me be the first to say this plainly: These Judges deserve to be killed.” The postings included photographs, phone numbers, work address and room numbers of these judges, along with a photo of the building in which they work and a map of its location.

Yeah ... posting the personal information of people you don't like on the Intertoobz. What can possibly go wrong there?

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Apropos of absolutely nothing, there's been an increasingly bizarre story of GOP governor of South Carolina Mark Sanford who vanished for a few days, then turned up claiming he'd been hiking the Appalachian Trail, then ... oh, hell, go read Think Progress. This gets weirder by the minute.

RUH ROH ... I think someone has some 'splainin' to do. I'm sure Canada's Blogging Tories will be all over this once they finally stop bitching and moaning about Michelle Obama's forearms.WOW ... someone's touchy.

And for the gazillionth time, the CBC (like so many of the painfully useless mainstream media outlets before it) misrepresents the case of one Omar Khadr by claiming -- in this case on tonight's episode of "As It Happens" -- that Khadr is accused of killing an American "medic."

No.

Stop.

EPIC FAIL!

Once and for all, can we set the record straight? Khadr's alleged victim (and there is substantial evidence that Khadr is not even guilty) was not a "medic". Let's let Wikipedia deal with this myth:

Sergeant First Class (SFC) Christopher James Speer (September 9, 1973–August 6, 2002) was a soldier in an American special forces unit, who was mortally wounded during a skirmish in Afghanistan, on July 27, 2002. Speer, who was not wearing a helmet at the time, suffered a head wound from a grenade, and died of his injuries approximately two weeks later.

So, SFC Speer was a "soldier" in a "special forces unit." How ... odd. And, on that day, what sort of "medic"y stuff was he doing? Hmmmmmm ...

On the day of the skirmish he was part of a squad assigned the task of going through the ruins, looking for weapons, and evidence of terrorism.

You know, that doesn't sound very "medic"y to me. What's up with that? What's a "medic" doing digging around for weapons and stuff like that? Ahhhhh ... suddenly, it's clear (emphasis added):

Speer received paramedic training at the Joint Special Operations University, in Hurlburt Field, Florida.

Under international humanitarian law (the law of war), medics are a specially protected class of noncombatants, the killing of which is considered a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions. However, according to Article 24 and Article 40, in order to qualify as noncombatant medical personnel, the individual must display certain insignia. At the time, however, Speer was not acting as a medic, and was not afforded "non-combatant status" under the Geneva Convention.

In other words, Speer was not a "medic" or, at the very least, was not acting in that capacity and had not clearly identified himself as one. Quite simply, Speer was a special forces soldier who just happened to have some paramedic training. Period.

This, of course, doesn't change much of what happened that day, and Khadr should still be put on trial to see exactly what he's guilty of. But it's time to stop portraying Speer as a "medic," which is a blatantly obvious playing of the sympathy card.

Regardless of what Khadr is or is not guilty of, Special Forces Sgt. Christopher Speer was a soldier on the field of combat. Continually describing him simply as a "medic" solely for the sake of tugging at the heartstrings is dishonest and shameful.

Now this is the sort of thinking we need in a great nation like Canada. I can walk into the local convenience store and find a variety of dried carcass chews and jerky waiting on the counter, right by the till, 'cos that's where the customer is at their gnawingest. With our economy under stress, one never knows when the bottom might fall out and we'll have to eat our money. Let me tell you, I'll have a damned sight more respect for an entrepreneur that hands me a business card that I can live on than yet another pontsie die-cut rectangle of affectation. Want meat card! Want.

And given that Canadian citizen and six-year exile Abousfian Abdelrazik has finally been ordered to be returned, and has been cleared by both the RCMP and CSIS, and that the current crop of brownshirts running this country has run out of excuses and has grudgingly agreed to bring him home, it would be just about time for some exciting new revelations to smear the man in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... ah, there we go.

Are we allowed to wonder whose fingerprints are all over that?IF I WAS A BETTING MAN, I'd bet that Stephen Harper and his loyal Harperbots will use this new "revelation" to suddenly decide that, maybe, they need time to check this out more closely, upon whose heels there will be a frantic appeal or request for extension of the original repatriation deadline.

Anyone want a piece of that action?

BONUS TRACK: While it may not be perfectly relevant, I did sort of call this several days ago. That was the easiest prediction I ever made.

Blogging Tory and Canadian military dad Paul Marek gets all emotional and weepy over a military suicide. Which is curious since, when the Star and the CBC did reports just last year on the increasing incidence of suicide among Canada's soldiers, the media sucked.

From the relative safety of her Delisle Nazi Memorabilia and Dog Breeding Roadside Attraction, Canada's Awesomest blogger Kate McMillan is happy to give advice to those who would have to, you know, implement it:

And if Kate gets any angrier, why, she's got the appropriate t-shirt and fridge magnet and, by God, she's not afraid to use them.

I would be remiss if I didn't occasionally remind you of this. Bring a friend. Bring several. We will, above all, strive for civility and decorum, and I promise to insult only those who truly deserve it.

Holding true to its motto of misrepresenting all the news that's fit to print, the Post saves a few bucks by dipping into its pool of excitable, wanky bloggers to tab the one known as "Raphael Alexander," who does to journalism what a couple of banjo players once did to Ned Beatty:

What Ms. Evans said is something very close to my own heart. My own family sacrifices a great deal in order for my wife to stay at home full-time to raise our two young children. Her earning potential is at least as great as mine, and together we could probably afford a home, more savings, more investment, and more long-term security. But we didn’t want to leave our children with people in a daycare, or have their formative years shaped by people hired to look after them. That was a personal decision we made, and we’re happy with the results. Our kids are very well bonded with their mother, and they are very happy and secure.

Gosh, Ralphie, that's an eloquent defense, and it would almost make me feel charitable, except for the fact that it's crap. Evans wasn't simply extolling the virtues of having a stay-at-home parent -- she was explicitly demeaning and denigrating those couples who opted for a different choice. Let me refresh your memory, Raph, you insufferable twit (emphasis towel-smackingly added):

Alberta's Liberal leader is demanding an apology from Finance Minister Iris Evans, who suggested that in order to raise children "properly" one parent should stay at home while the other goes to work...

"They've understood perfectly well that when you're raising children, you don't both go off to work and leave them for somebody else to raise," Evans said...

See what's happening there, Raph? She's out-and-out dissing those parents who, for whatever reason, might both need to bring home the bacon as it were. Ah, but such distinctions are lost on "Raphael Alexander," who continues his noble defense by, well, lying about what Evans said:

That isn’t to say that we know whether our choice was the right one. That’s the beauty of personal choice; it isn’t a “debate” as Ms. Evans said on Friday when she apologized for starting a controversy with parents arguing what is ultimately best for their kids. The fact is that there is no right answer that would be satisfactory to end such a debate. Nobody knows what the absolute best thing is when raising children, which is why parents often make decisions that they feel is best for them, and for them alone. Nobody else can make the decisions but the parents.

Quite so, Raph -- the beauty of "choice" -- which is precisely what Evans wasn't acknowledging when she slagged one choice while praising another. And, sadly, "Raphael" continues his eye-rolling dumbassitude right to the very end of his journalistically fecal-smeared contribution to public discourse by yammering on about the beauty of "choice" that Evans never uttered:

My wife deserves the freedom of choice to raise our children in the way Ms. Evans spoke of, and doesn’t have an obligation to answer to anyone but the needs of her family.

That would be such an eloquent and touching finish, Raph, if it were not for the fact that you're full of shit and are carefully avoiding what Evans actually said. But let's not be too hard on "Raphael." This is, after all, the National Post, and we all know what that means. Journalistic integrity optional. Or just plain discouraged.

Any opinion that doesn't parrot the twisted ideology of the left is condoned as intolerant. On the upside we've seen how the minority leftwingers respect free speech, they don't if you espouse something that doesn't 'mirror their twisted dogma of "It takes a village to raise a child". Of course they never asked society if we wanted to be burdened with their brats.

And by "twisted ideology of the left," I believe Sassylassie means "basic literacy." But that's just a guess.

LET THE FUN BEGIN: Why, yes, I did leave that comment that just appeared on that Full Comment piece. Now let's watch how quickly its contents are distorted and misrepresented, and how quickly the strawmen are dragged out and flayed mercilessly. You know it's coming.

WELL, THAT DIDN'T LAST LONG: It was up and, less than five minutes later, it was gone. Not quite the journalistic profile in courage you were looking for, was it?

I don't see a problem. Do you see a problem?

OH, WAIT ... suddenly it's back. I see massive entertainment value in all of this.

Shorter weaselly wankers: "Given that it's my blog, I have the right to run it any way I want, including posting ignorant, sexist, racist and libelous and defamatory swill, scientifically illiterate nonsense or just plain eliminationism, then dealing with feedback by, perhaps, not allowing comments at all, or moderating them and being deliciously selective about who gets their say and accidentally dropping others on the floor, or editing comments to misrepresent their contents, or maybe inviting feedback only to jerk people around by turning on moderation without warning when things get uncomfortable, followed by banning people who don't agree with me and describing as "trolls" anyone with the effrontery to show up and try to engage me intellectually, dredging up irrelevant two-year-old slights to discredit someone's opinion, denigrating perfectly reasonable contributors as "sock puppets" simply because of how they arrived at my blog, perhaps culminating in referring to any critics as "stupid lefty retards, HA HA" or something similar and responding to any reasoned, thoughtful and nuanced analysis of my position with, "LOL! ROTFL! OMFG, sweet Jesus, Oh dear Lord!!!!", then claiming "victory!" and cutting off any further discussion just as I'm getting my ass handed to me on a plate. And maybe even dropping the whole damned thing down the memory hole when no one's looking because it made me look like an utter twatwaffle and I don't feel like ever apologizing, retracting or correcting the record after it turns out I've been a horrific dumbshit and all those critics were right after all. Because it's my blog and I can run it ANY WAY I WANT!!1!11!1"

"On the other hand, someone else on their own blog calling me an "ignorant douchebag" is completely and totally unacceptable behaviour. That shouldn't be allowed."

The friggin' sticker says support our troops and does not say support our troops in Afghanistan. Pieces of shit bitch about nothing but then again everything they say is asshole. The wonderful piece of shit members of the Council of Canadians are also intertwined with the wonderful piece of shit 9/11 troofers and typically spend their time attacking the one issue wonder of water trade with Obama's America. Outside of that they masturbate a lot, spend time on the 'progressive' Canadian forum Rabble and in general are around to oppose the old American administration of George Bush and promote social justice which is just another word for communism.

Hope you die you bastards, hope you die.

Canada's compassionate conservatives: Always giving you a choice since some people might not like blues.

BONUS TRACK: And at no extra charge, we give you one of Darcey's bloggers-in-crime, one "Krazy," explaining how to deal with those uppity broads. And the only reason I mention this is that Sitemeter just this minute gifted me with this.

Disclaimer: At no time was any private information harmed in the making of this post.

For many, many, many months, the incessant, relentless screeching and shrieking of how CC is such a mean, rude guy and how he'd never say that stuff to people to their faces and, boy, is it lucky he hides behind that anonymity and, man, if we ever got ahold of him, that pathetic coward, ooooooooh ...

For the last couple days, the frantic and desperate shuttering and moderation of comments sections, as the aforementioned troglodytes barricade the doors to make sure I can't drop by and tear someone a new orifice.

Who could have imagined that's how it would turn out?

P.S. If you truly want me to call you a "douchebag" to your face, you can find me here. It'll cost you five bucks, but I'm sure it will be money well spent.

SiteMeter tells me that someone at the CBC just Googled on "John Bowman" and "CBC" and ended up here. I'm guessing that is so not what they were after.

P.S. For reasons I'd rather not get into, the thought of someone at the CBC doing a perfectly respectable Google search and ending up with Ti-Guy talking about Stephen Taylor's boobs gives me a perverse pleasure. Does that make me a bad person?

And now that the Stephen Harper Party of Canada has finally relented and is willing to, you know, obey the law in the case of Abousfian Abdelrazik, it is now critically necessary for at least one Blogging Tory to suddenly and conveniently reveal heretofore unknown information with which to besmirch Mr. Abdelrazik.

Good job, Raph. Your predictability makes blogging a lot less work than it might be.

FOR THE RECORD, Raphael's douchebagitude is nothing new. We've seen it before. Seriously, if you think we here at CC HQ don't support the troops, you need to go read Dave's piece, follow the links, and keep going into the comments. Must-read blogging.

Huh. Some interesting hashtags there ... like that one, "#roft". What's that all about? Oh, yeah:

So how are things over there at the Manning Centre, Stephen? Nice to see you hard at work, building democracy and everything. And if you ever figure out that part of democracy is the right to free speech and, maybe, the expectation of privacy, drop me a note. I definitely have some thoughts on that.

Over at Kate McMillan's "I Hate You, So Please Share Your Needles And Die Already" Roadhouse and Monster Truck Tattoo Parlor, guest poster "EBD" tries to get all pundity like the grown-ups (no, I'm not linking anymore, you'll just have to trust me):

"Barack? We need to talk...."

In an article published last Saturday in the WSJ.com, Paul Starobin suggests that America, as a direct reaction to an ever-growing and more powerful central government, may edge towards being "an assembly of largely autonomous regional republics." Starobin sees the unmistakable growth of secessionist sentiment in Texas, Alaska and elsewhere, ...

American Thinker's George Joyce, in a review of Starobin's piece, writes "A failed presidency for Barack Obama could turn into liberalism's worst nightmare. Barely six months into his term, the 44th president has succeeded in generating the most widespread and serious discussion of secession since the Civil War. Despite what Newsweek's Evan Thomas may claim, Obama is not the 'God' who will bring us together but the autocratic sponsor of an overbearing, oppressive leviathan from which a growing number of Americans are seeking refuge...

In light of America's consistent historic reaction to any attempt to impose control from a distance, some form of major push-back against Obama's preening emperor-act seems almost inevitable. Let's keep our fingers crossed...

Posted by EBD at June 18, 2009 5:57 PM

If the yobs are really serious about this, others have already made a suggestion:

Today Canadian Public Safety Minister, Peter Van Loan, introduced legislation which will allow police to access personal information about the sender or receiver of any electronic message without a warrant.

Apparently, when the Stephen Harper Party of Canada campaigned on a platform of "transparency," they weren't talking for themselves. They could have made that a bit more obvious.

P.S. It should be fun to see how Canada's Blogging Cementheads spin this one. In particular, I'd dearly like to know what Wingnut Welfare Wonder Boy Stephen Taylor thinks of it. I'm sure his tenure over at the Manning Centre for Building Democracy has taught him all kinds of nifty things about, well, democracy. I'm sure he will be very eloquent in his defense of this legislation.

I'm sure I will get another blog post out of it. The word "douchebag" is likely to feature prominently.

Like, say, the dozen 64-bit AMD laptops I own, which actually do have a purpose since they form the nucleus of a travelling classroom. But when I'm not teaching, they kind of sit there, lonely and forlorn (except when I need a test system or two for whatever the heck I want).

But a lady I know who doesn't deserve it has been diagnosed with MS, and it's getting harder and harder for her to go up and down the stairs to get to her computer, so she asked if I had a spare laptop she could keep downstairs and, yeah, I'm pretty sure I can spare one for however long it's useful.

So if you're a geek and your girlfriend keeps giving you evil looks about the geek crap you keep buying, just tell her that, sure, you might not need it right this minute. But, hey, you never know.

TWEET ME, BABY: Since there's very little left for me to hide, if you're interested, you can follow me on Twitter. But be warned -- that Twitter account is pure geek and CC-free. So unless you're sincerely interested in my random musings on Linux and open source, there's no point. The word "douchebag" will never come up.

Over at Wendy's, "NAMBLA" Dick has announced that he's filing a statement of claim against me. I haven't seen anything, and I have no idea what it's about but, given his history, I have to believe he really is stupid enough to think he has a case.

So I'll be shameless -- it's now the CC Legal Defense and Single-Malt Scotch PayPal Fund. If we go to court, the lawyers get it. If we don't, the LCBO gets it. No, you can't have it back, but I'll think of you as I'm opening the bottle. Either way, I like to think of it as a good cause. I always blog better with a glass of 15-year-old Macallan beside me.

P.S. If there's enough loot, I might go after a few other people. I'd start with Wendy Sullivan. She has it coming.

I really and truly wanted to ignore this but I've finally had enough and I'm going to address it, once and for all, and move on.

At the moment, in festering, right-wing pig lagoons like Wendy "Right Girl" Sullivan's, the current meme is, "CC threatened Dick Evans' kids! He threatened to harm them! He's a monster!!!" So let's get to the bottom of this, shall we?

Long story short: for no reason that he has ever provided (and can't provide), Richard Evans claims that I support or enable pedophilia and, as an attempt at what passes for clever wit in his household, he once registered a lookalike domain name to this one, and redirected it to NAMBLA (the North American Man-Boy Love Association), thereby driving readers to a web site that promotes sex with children and child rape. That was Dick's idea of intellectual discourse in the blogosphere.

Not surprisingly, I was seriously unhappy at that creepy misrepresentation, and what followed was a period of increasingly acriminous blogging, culminating in me (very unwisely, I will admit) tossing out the following threat:

So here's the deal -- as long as Dick insists on redirecting that look-alike domain to NAMBLA, I will continue to post increasingly personal information about his family. See how that works? In short, what happens from here on out is entirely in Dick's hands. All that remains to be seen is whether it's more important for Dick to protect his family's privacy, or for him to score points being an irresponsible dipshit.

(You don't need a link for that, since I'm admitting I wrote it and you're about to see it again soon, anyway.)

So, out of a sense of absolute frustration, I snapped and wrote something stupid, but I have never acted on that and my motivation was that, if I just sounded dangerous, Dick Evans might finally back off and do the right thing. I was bluffing, and hoping he fell for it. And it's not even like I was demanding anything unreasonable -- take down that dishonest web site, stop lying about me, and it'll be over and we can move on. Not such an unreasonable demand, yes?

You won't believe what happened next. A normal person, "threatened" thusly, might have cared about their kids' safety and done the right thing. A "normal" person might have immediately reported said "threats" to the authorities. A "normal" person might have put their children's safety above the freedom to continue a stupid, crass, tasteless (and defamatory) practical joke. Dick Evans is not a normal person. This is his response, a screenshot from here, in case Dick ever tries to go back and erase the evidence:

Go back and read that again. And again. Slowly. And really and truly appreciate what happened there.

While currently running around the Intertoobz crying and shrieking about how I was looking to threaten his children, the one time I wrote something that could be interpreted that way, Dick Evans showed no fear whatsoever. No concern. No anxiety. No, he did something else.

He explicitly invited me to go after his kids. "Do your best," he wrote. Bring it on. They're fair game.

Make sure you understand the mind-numbing callousness of a father who, when presented with what he perceives as danger to his children, invites it. "Do your best." But now, because it suits his purposes, Dick is running around to anyone who will listen, claiming to be petrified for the sake of his kids from that bad old CC. The bad old CC to which he offered up his children for attack. In public. Because he was having fun in the blogosphere and he didn't feel like quitting.

Richard Evans has no grounds for whining about anything. He's not scared of me, and he never has been. All this weepy fear of his is utterly and totally bogus, and he's proved it by cheerily and publicly offering up his children for attack. But now he wants to play the "concerned parent" card.

Not likely, Dick. And I'm done debating this with you. Anyone who runs across Dick's pathetic and insincere blubbering anywhere on the Intertoobz is welcome to link back to this post. I'm not going to address this "CC threatened to harm Dick's kids" crap anymore. Yes, what I wrote was idiotic, and I did it in the vain hope that I could pull off the bluff, and this would be resolved, and we could all get back to blogging. It never occurred to me that Dick Evans valued a wicked practical joke more than the safety of his own children.

Ah, well. Live and learn.AFTERSNARK: One of the other memes over at Wendy's Pig Lagoon is the screeching of, "CC suggested people find what school they go to, and talk to their teachers, and point out Dick's obsession with NAMBLA, and that's a horrible thing to suggest since that would obviously open them up to harassment."

Well, yeah, it might. Maybe almost as much as having a father who openly and publicly flaunts his obsession with pedophilia web sites and uses lookalike domain names to promote them by directing traffic to them. Dick apparently wants the freedom to do that, but he wants the inevitable backlash from it to be someone else's fault. That's awfully convenient.

It's amusing that Dick's rabid defenders are shrieking constantly about how I should be held accountable for what I've written, but that Dick should, curiously, get a free pass for his behaviour. Apparently, accountability for thee but not for me. That's always the way it works with these people, isn't it?

You wrapped yourself in the mantle of pedophilia and child rape sites, Dick. You openly and publicly got into bed with a web site that promotes the sexual exploitation of children, because it seemed like such a wicked cool practical joke at the time. Today? Eh ... not so much.

You made that decision, Dick. So you could at least have the decency and integrity to wear it proudly, without whining about it. In short, Dick, your increasingly public perception as a spokesperson for the sexual exploitation of kids is not my fault. There's only one person who's responsible for that. And -- hint -- it's not me.

"Hello? Yes, yes, I'm that CC, what can I do for you? Long-time reader and fan? Cool, thanks, always nice to hear. Linux? Yeaaahhhh, I've been around the block a few times, why do you ask? Training? That you read about on my web site? You bet. Why, yes, I do have a resume, it should be in your mailbox later this morning. And, yes, I am available for travel, thanks for asking. Yeah, Wendy Sullivan is a lying douchebag."

I’m not entirely sure you have the first clue about what it takes to "raise children properly". Perhaps you should consider thinking before opening your mouth and spewing forth with your oh-so-precious misogynistic musings, hmmmm?

Yours in endless contempt,LuLu

P.S. Have you met SUZANNE and Hunter? You girls have soooooooooo much in common when it comes to women who have the unmitigated gall to think we’re no longer living in the Fifties.

The comments were "certainly targetted at financial literacy and not at people who had to work out of the home and be away from the children. It wasn't and if they inadvertently, or if the way it's been reported, offends somebody, I do apologize," Iris Evans told CBC News Thursday evening after her remarks were reported by The Canadian Press.

"But it was never with the intent to slam parenting as people do when they have children in alternative care or daycare. It was an intent to point out the importance of the early years in teaching skills to children whether its behavioural issues or financial literacy."

*Sigh*. Again. Regarding the pithy, rude and vaguely threatening e-mail I received recently (no, don't go back and look for it, that's not why we're here), I've been informed by more than one person that, given that e-mailer's Internet Service Provider, it's easy to match that to an optional web page that each subscriber is given and, sho 'nuff, there he is -- in living colour, so I now know exactly what he looks like.

Another e-mailer, without my knowledge, permission or blessing, did a little digging and I now know more about said e-mailer.

Please stop.

Seriously, stop doing that. Let it go. I'm not interested.

I appreciate your concern that this is serious business and that one should immediately forward sinister, ominous transmissions to the proper authorities, etc, etc, yadda, yadda, yadda. And if I thought this was serious, I'd be doing exactly that.

But I don't think it's serious. I think it was just a clueless gomer venting, puffing out his chest and trying to act all studly and he-man, with no intention of doing anything about it. And while I have every right to mock and ridicule said gomer in public and make his life suddenly much more uncomfortable, I've decided that that's a bad idea.

Someone got pissed and did something stupid and intemperate. Does that merit personal revenge? Not so far. So while I appreciate the effort, please stop trying to help like that. I know you mean well, but we're not going down that road.

P.S. I have, in fact, taken down that earlier posting with the identifying e-mail address. Sure, you can probably get it out of Google cache or something, but please don't. Stupid people sometimes do stupid things. And, sometimes, the best reaction is to just shrug and move on.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Evening at the Starlight, sadly cut short by the fact that I have deliverables for tomorrow, but caught Jenn Grant as the opening act and about half of Danny Michel. So I'll leave you with this. Not a great video but definitely something live.

Now I have to poke around to figure out how to embed an MP3. I'm guessing that won't be hard.